Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 329, 556–566 (2002) Constraining the LMC cluster age gap: Washington photometry of NGC 2155 and SL 896 (LW 480) Andre´s E. Piatti,1P Ata Sarajedini,2P Doug Geisler,3P Eduardo Bica4P and Juan J. Claria´5P Downloaded from 1Instituto de Astronomı´a y Fisica del Espacio, CC 67, Suc. 28, 1428 Capital Federal, Argentina 2Department of Astronomy, University of Florida, PO Box 112055, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA 3Universidad de Concepcio´n, Departamento de Fı´sica, Casilla 160-C, Concepcio´n, Chile 4Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Depto. de Astronomı´a, CP 15051, Porto Alegre, 91500-970, Brazil 5 Observatorio Astrono´mico, Laprida 854, 5000 Co´rdoba, Argentina http://mnras.oxfordjournals.org/ Accepted 2001 September 20. Received 2001 September 3; in original form 2001 June 14 ABSTRACT We carried out Washington system photometry of the intermediate-age Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC) star clusters NGC 2155 and SL 896 (LW 480). We derive ages and metallicities at Fundação Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento Pessoal Nível Superior on February 24, 2014 from the T1 versus C 2 T1 colour–magnitude diagrams (CMDs). For the first time an age has been obtained for SL 896, 2:3 ^ 0:5 Gyr. For NGC 2155 we derive 3:6 ^ 0:7 Gyr. The two clusters basically define the lower age limit of the LMC age gap. In particular, NGC 2155 is confirmed as the oldest intermediate-age LMC cluster so far studied. The derived metallicities are ½Fe=H¼20:9 ^ 0:2and20:6 ^ 0:2 for NGC 2155 and SL 896, respectively. We also studied the CMDs of the surrounding fields, which have a dominant turn-off comparable to that of the clusters themselves, and similar metallicity, showing that one is dealing with an intermediate-age disc where clusters and field stars have the same origin. We inserted the present clusters in the LMC and Small Magellanic Cloud (SMC) age– metallicity relations, using a set of homogeneous determinations with the same method as in our previous studies, now totalling 15 LMC clusters and four SMC clusters, together with some additional values from the literature. The LMC and SMC age–metallicity relations appear to be remarkably complementary, since the SMC was actively star-forming during the LMC quiescent age gap epoch. Key words: techniques: photometric – galaxies: individual: LMC – Magellanic Clouds – galaxies: star clusters. Telescope (HST ) BV colour–magnitude diagrams (CMDs), 1 INTRODUCTION Sarajedini (1998, hereafter S98) argued that the populous LMC The cluster formation history of the Magellanic Clouds constitutes clusters NGC 2121, NGC 2155 and SL 663 have ages of <4 Gyr, one of the most visible records of the formation and evolution thus lying slightly within the gap as previously determined, or patterns of these galaxies. Da Costa (1991) first drew attention to alternatively indicating a smaller age range for the gap. Recently, the existence of a substantial gap in the age distribution of Large Rich, Shara & Zurek (2001) found an age of 3:2 ^ 0:5 Gyr for Magellanic Cloud (LMC) star clusters. Although this galaxy has a NGC 2121 using their own deeper HST observations. The sample number of bona fide old ‘globular’ clusters similar to those in our of genuine LMC globular clusters (i.e. with ages similar to those of Galaxy, and also contains a rich population of young and Galactic globulars) with HST CMDs is now significant (e.g. Olsen intermediate-age clusters (IACs), there is only a single cluster et al. 1998; Johnson et al. 1999). Surprisingly, recent HST -based known with an age between ,3 and 12 Gyr. A variety of recent field star studies (e.g. Geha et al. 1998; Olsen 1999; Holtzman et al. studies have dedicated efforts to improve ages and metallicities, 1999) have made it increasingly clear that this age gap apparently and increase the sample of old clusters and IACs in order to does not exist in the general LMC field. However, Harris & delineate this gap more accurately and search for more clusters that Zaritsky (2001) have very recently argued from their relatively might lie within it (e.g. Geisler et al. 1997). Using Hubble Space shallow ground-based data that this gap may indeed also exist in the field star age distribution. PE-mail: [email protected] (AEP); [email protected]fl.edu (AS); doug@ Clearly, the presence and nature of the age gap, both in kukita.cfm.udec.cl (DG); [email protected] (EB); [email protected]. the clusters as well as in the field, require substantially more edu (JJC) work. The improved determination of the LMC overall cluster q 2002 RAS Constraining the LMC cluster age gap 557 age–metallicity relation (AMR) can give further constraints for a In Section 2 we present the observations. In Sections 3 and 4 we more realistic modelling of the history of star formation and analyse the cluster CMDs and determine their ages and chemical enrichment. Cluster giants with high dispersion metallicities, respectively, as well as those of their surrounding spectroscopy can provide fundamental calibrations and detailed fields. In Section 5 we discuss our results and in Section 6 we elemental ratios, such as those obtained for 10 giants observed summarize the main conclusions of this work. recently with VLT/UVES in four clusters widely distributed in age (Hill et al. 2000). Dirsch et al. (2000) have discussed the LMC Downloaded from 2 OBSERVATIONS AMR based on Stro¨mgren photometry in a wide range of ages. The Washington system is very useful for age and metallicity The LMC star clusters NGC 2155 and SL 896, as well as their determinations in IACs and globular clusters. In particular, surrounding fields, were observed during two photometric nights metallicity sensitivity is considerably larger than in the Johnson with the Cerro Tololo Inter-American Observatory (CTIO) 0.9-m system (Geisler & Sarajedini 1999). A significant sample of LMC telescope in 1998 November. The Cassegrain Focus Imager clusters and fields have now been gathered. In addition, both the (CFIM) and the Tektronix 2K #3 charge-coupled device (CCD) http://mnras.oxfordjournals.org/ mapping of the AMR and its possible spatial dependence have been were used in combination with the Washington (Canterna 1976) C the subject of several previous studies in this series (Geisler et al. and Kron–Cousins R filters. The recommended prescription for the 1997; Bica et al. 1998; Piatti et al. 1999). C filter that we used is the one given in Geisler (1996): 3mm The present study deals with Washington photometry of two BG3 þ 2 mm BG40. However, Geisler (private communication) clusters closely related to the gap phenomenon: NGC 2155 and now recommends the following prescription: 3mm BG3 þ 4mm SL 896. NGC 2155 is one of the three clusters studied by S98 and is BG40. The latter avoids a small red leak that is present in the therefore critical to delineate the lower age limit of the gap. Note previous prescription. Geisler (1996) has shown that the RKC filter that the derived ages of S98 depend sensitively on his metallicities, is a very efficient substitute for the Washington T1 filter and that which were derived from the slope and colour of the giant branch in C 2 R accurately reproduces C 2 T1 over at least the range at Fundação Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento Pessoal Nível Superior on February 24, 2014 the BV CMDs. The superior metallicity sensitivity of the 20:2 # C 2 T1 # 3:3. We decided to use the Washington system Washington system should help pin down this important parameter. because of its combination of broad bands and high metallicity SL 896 (LW 480) drew our attention because of its relatively low sensitivity provided by the C filter, and the wide colour baseline metallicity, determined from spectroscopy of a single giant: between C and T1. Additionally, we were determined to maintain ½Fe=H¼20:89, as compared to NGC 2155, which has ½Fe=H¼ consistency with our previous studies in this series. These data, 20:55 (Olszewski et al. 1991). Although no age is available for aside from providing us with age determinations, will also allow us SL 896, its low metallicity level suggests that it might also be to derive accurate metal abundances, based on the standard giant similar in age to the unique cluster ESO 121-SC03 branch technique outlined in Geisler & Sarajedini (1999). The ð½Fe=H¼20:93, Olszewski et al. 1991), which is the lone cluster detector used ð2048 £ 2048 pixelsÞ has a pixel size of 24 mm, lying in the age gap. It is also important to determine ages and producing a scale on the chip of 00:396 pixel21 (focal ratio f/13.5) metallicities for the two clusters homogeneously, placing them and a field of view of 139:5 £ 139:5. The CCD was controlled by the among LMC clusters with previous Washington photometry, trying CTIO ARCON 3.3 data acquisition system in the standard quad to further probe and constrain the age gap limits and, in turn, the amplifier mode operating at a gain setting of 1.5 e2/ADU with a details of the AMR. In addition, we continued our related studies of readout noise of 4.2 e2 rms. Only a single exposure in each filter the field populations surrounding LMC clusters. was obtained per cluster. Exposures ranging between 2100 and Let us now consider the locations of these two clusters with 2400 s in C, and between 600 and 900 s in RKC were taken for the respect to the nearly circular internal LMC disc, where the young two selected fields.